DOJ will not defend Obamacare law...

So, there is little question that hypocrisy is the bedrock of liberalism on this point. As it became clear that the DOJ will not defend Obamacare against arguments that the law is now unconstitutional without the individual mandate, liberal heads began exploding all over the country.

Now, the irony of all of this is the acknowledgement from many of these liberals that the Obama Administration may have created this whole mess when they decided not to defend the "defense of marriage" act in court.

Of course, as hypocrites will generally argue, there is good reason for the hypocrisy. The Obama DOJ had a good reason to not defend that particular law, whereas the Trump DOJ has no good reason not to defend the law.

However, on paper, the argument that the DOJ would have to make sort of runs contrary to both the the original DOJ argument, as well as the ruling that the Supreme Court offered on the subject of both Obamacare, and the individual mandate. The DOJ basically argued that not only was the individual mandate a tax, but that this tax was fundamentally necessary to keep the law constitutional. The USSC basically agreed. Without the tax (which has been legally rewritten as a tax of zero dollars), would the expectation "really" be that the DOJ would go back into court, and argue the opposite of what they originally argued on this specific point?

Seems like a tough argument to make... at least logically. Of course, the left rarely allows "logic" to get in the way of their emotional arguments.

All of this being said, the Obamacare law has defenders. Many states are representing the interests of the Obamacare law, as was allowed by the courts. I would argue that these states will make a much more robust argument than the DOJ would have made, and can do so without completely reversing their previous legal argument.